Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-20-2010, 04:22 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,386,012 times
Reputation: 8672

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117 View Post
The Taliban was not our ally against the Soviets. The Taliban formed a few years after the USSR collapsed. We supported what later became the Northern Alliance, which was a resistance movement against the Taliban revolutionaries in the 90s. For a [very] brief time in the 90s the Clinton administration recognized the Taliban government, but eventually the state department distanced the US from them once it was revealed how oppressive they were.

When we invaded Afghanistan in 2001, our old allies from the Soviet-Afghan war assisted the US and are now key components of the Afghan government. When we leave Afghanistan, the same factions - the Northern Alliance and the Taliban - will be right back at each others throats.
Oh please, many of the same people who were part of the "Taliban" were the same Mujahideen fighters we supported during the Afghan-Soviet war.

Same guys, different hats, we can deal with them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-20-2010, 04:28 PM
 
13,685 posts, read 9,007,828 times
Reputation: 10405
Well, I certainly am against this prolonged 'war' in Afghanistan. I well recall the invasion and war by the Soviet Union (who were not so concerned about limiting 'collateral damage') and they simply could not conquer that country. Nor could the British way back when.

Of course, as a human being, I am appalled at the thought of those poor people being under the thumb of the Taliban again (which I feel is certain at some point). But not concerned enough to keep seeing 'body bags' flown back home to this country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2010, 04:33 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,386,012 times
Reputation: 8672
Quote:
Originally Posted by legalsea View Post
Well, I certainly am against this prolonged 'war' in Afghanistan. I well recall the invasion and war by the Soviet Union (who were not so concerned about limiting 'collateral damage') and they simply could not conquer that country. Nor could the British way back when.

Of course, as a human being, I am appalled at the thought of those poor people being under the thumb of the Taliban again (which I feel is certain at some point). But not concerned enough to keep seeing 'body bags' flown back home to this country.
Nor could Alexander the Great.

Afghanistan, aka "The grave yard of empires"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2010, 04:35 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,045,063 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
Oh please, many of the same people who were part of the "Taliban" were the same Mujahideen fighters we supported during the Afghan-Soviet war.
Frankie is essentially correct. The Taliban was largely populated by Afghan orphans raised and educated in Pakistan with financial help from the Saudis. They rose to prominence because of the infighting between former members of the Mujahideen. Granted, Mohammed Omar wasn't one of these orphans and was indeed a former soldier with the Mujahideen, but to argue that the major players in the Taliban were the same as the Mujahideen just isn't correct.


[/quote]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2010, 04:40 PM
 
Location: Southeast
4,301 posts, read 7,033,437 times
Reputation: 1464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
Oh please, many of the same people who were part of the "Taliban" were the same Mujahideen fighters we supported during the Afghan-Soviet war.

Same guys, different hats, we can deal with them.
Perhaps the fighters themselves were split between the two (it was a civil war after all), but the majority of the 80s era mujaheddin leaders were commanders in the Northern Alliance, or if they supported the Taliban they eventually became dissidents that later fled to Pakistan or joined the Northern Alliance. The current president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, was one of the key figures used by the CIA to facilitate the training of mujaheddin against the Soviets..

Last edited by Frankie117; 08-20-2010 at 04:50 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2010, 04:57 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,868 posts, read 24,386,012 times
Reputation: 8672
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie117 View Post
Perhaps the fighters themselves were split between the two (it was a civil war after all), but the majority of the 80s era mujaheddin leaders were commanders in the Northern Alliance, or if they supported the Taliban they eventually became dissidents that later fled to Pakistan or joined the Northern Alliance. The current president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, was one of the key figures used by the CIA to facilitate the training of mujaheddin against the Soviets..
There was a news report out the other day that said that many of the fighters in the north who are still fighting today, have been so isolated, they think they are still fighting the Soviets, I am no kidding.

Many of the same people who were our allies, are now our enemies. My point is that many of them can still be converted over to our side, we've just got to let them have their country back.

I understand the history of the Taliban, and where they came from, but many of their followers, and the people who are still fighting us, were former allies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2010, 05:12 PM
 
31,387 posts, read 37,045,063 times
Reputation: 15038
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979 View Post
I understand the history of the Taliban, and where they came from, but many of their followers, and the people who are still fighting us, were former allies.
In this context, calling the rank and file members of the various Pashtun factions that fought as members of the mujaheddin is too stretch the word to a point where it begins to have no meaning. For the U.S. and for the most part, even the CIA were silent and invisible partners to the war against the Soviets, so if there are some Pastun tribesmen who think they are still fighting the Soviets I doubt that they would have known that the U.S. surreptitiously funneled money and resources through Pakistan's Inter-Service Intelligence Agency. In fact from what I recall reading, CIA field agents never even operated from within Afghanistan only working with a limited number of senior members of the Mujaheddin from the bases inside of Pakistan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2010, 05:52 PM
 
Location: Flippin AR
5,513 posts, read 5,240,443 times
Reputation: 6243
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanothermanger View Post
Erm, with all due respect.."make peace with the taliban"... and right off the bat, I do not think I will ever be able to change my mind on that one, so we will just have to agree to disagree and go on our happy way...Make peace with the taliban my azz...
True, you can't make peace with militant religious lunatics.

But also true, sending American soldiers around halfway across the world (when we're already $14 trillion in debt), to be shot at and blown up with IEDs, is equally pointless, not to mention moronic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2010, 07:17 PM
 
767 posts, read 489,382 times
Reputation: 215
When did we become more focused on the Taliban and less on Al Qaida? Never mind, when Bush decided to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2010, 05:19 AM
 
Location: My little patch of Earth
6,193 posts, read 5,367,972 times
Reputation: 3059
Sorry, but you cannot use such a percentage (60%).

Such figures are ignored by the current administration.


Your datum must be flawed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:30 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top